[Finn MacCool]

I agree the way we pressed was different, but ultimately pressing is about regaining possession of the ball and forcing your opposition into mistakes. In that regard yeah we got the same results you've been having against other teams. You guys couldn't handle it, especially Firmino and Sturridge.

One of the reasons its quite different is shown up in match stats (specifically running) - its obviously a hot topic in terms of can we sustain it over a season.

I haven't seen the stats but I would be very surprised if Utd ran further last night - this shows that the pressing you did was quite different to ours (not arguing whose is better btw - just pointing out there is a real difference).

 

[Kraftwerker]

Did you watch the game on TV or at Anfield? During the after match analysis they showed Utd had a back six on several occasions.

Also true of Liverpool when United had the ball, especially first half. Every man behind the ball sometimes look like that.

 

[Klopper76]

I think we were dominant in the first two thirds of the pitch. The final third kept letting us down. Ball wasn't sticking up front, some poor concession of possession, we were failing to get crosses in, and when we finally created a clear cut chance, it was fluffed.

Don't think anyone is saying United were brilliant from back to front.

Yeah I'd say based on the first half the final third was where you fell short. You did well to expose where we're weakest in possession. Karius, Lovren and Matip between them didn't seem to know what to do with it. I'm not really sure what the fix is for that but we need to find one because we seem to concede possession from that area of the pitch more than anywhere else. It's a huge difference from United who had De Gea with his kicking ability finding targets like Ibrahimovic, Pogba and Fellaini when he needed to. You had an option beyond the back line which we lacked.

 

[Dec9003]

Yeah 4th, my mistake - I don't think you can call it bad luck, your attack was pretty feeble.

Yeah we've been struggling with putting chances away for a few matches now unfortunately. That said under Van Gaal we'd make about 1 a match against the lower sides so there's a big improvement there. It's just a shame Martial and Mkhy have had injury hit starts to the season, I think we'd be higher in the league otherwise. That said, it's not a Manchester United season if we don't get an ever growing list of injuries.

 

[AXVnee7]

One of the reasons its quite different is shown up in match stats (specifically running) - its obviously a hot topic in terms of can we sustain it over a season.

I haven't seen the stats but I would be very surprised if Utd ran further last night - this shows that the pressing you did was quite different to ours (not arguing whose is better btw - just pointing out there is a real difference).

You guys ran about 112Km, we did about 10km less. I don't disagree that pressing is different, heck you may very well have the better way and be better at it. I'm just pointing out we did it successfully to you guys, where it was expected we would sit back from minute 1. Instead we were the ones applying the pressure (for the first half at least) and some of your players wilted under it.

 

[Klopper76]

No because De Gea matched the shots with ease. If we'd have got more shots on target Karius would've conceded for sure.

I'd say forcing a save from the keeper is as clear cut as chances get personally. You probably needed to do more with your opening 20 minutes. That was where United could have won the game. Contrary to the general consensus, we don't actually start quickly. We've started a fair few games slowly this season and then grown into them.

 

[Finn MacCool]

Also true of Liverpool when United had the ball, especially first half. Every man behind the ball sometimes look like that.

Its strange how that wasn't pointed out during the analysis after the game. Sky clearly showed times when Rashford and Young were part of back 6 and the ball wasn't that close to Utd's area. There is a difference between that and having your players behind the ball but in their own positions.

 

[Lucifer Rising]

A point at Anfield with the form that they're in is a result in my book. Mou set up not to lose and we could easily have nicked a win, job done.

 

[donkeyfish]

Did you watch the game on TV or at Anfield? During the after match analysis they showed Utd had a back six on several occasions.

We did, but it is quite common these days. You need something to cover the narrow winger.

It was as a reaction to your FB going high up though, and we managed to push out well until ca 75min.

Rashford, e.g., did the same thing against Pool last season in that terrible first half in the Europa League.

No sane manager seems to let his wingers shirk when playing against teams that likes to throw their backs into the attack

 

[Finn MacCool]

You guys ran about 112Km, we did about 10km less. I don't disagree that pressing is different, heck you may very well have the better way and be better at it. I'm just pointing out we did it successfully to you guys, where it was expected we would sit back from minute 1. Instead we were the ones applying the pressure (for the first half at least) and some of your players wilted under it.

Tbh I don't think any team can handle a good press (whatever type) from a quality well organised team. Thats why more and more teams are doing it to a higher degree. Of course the "can they handle it fro the whole season" debate comes up but football is evolving and this is rapidly becoming an integral part of the game.

 

[cyberman]

Did you watch the game on TV or at Anfield? During the after match analysis they showed Utd had a back six on several occasions.

So you had your eyes closed when the stat after 35 mins was double the amount of play being in your half than ours?
We were pressing you high up and winning every second ball, you can't do that if you pack the defence.

 

[Kraftwerker]

Its strange how that wasn't pointed out during the analysis after the game. Sky cleared showed times when Ashford and Young were part of back 6 and the ball wasn't that close to Utd's area. There is a difference between that and having your players behind the ball but in their own positions.

I don't really see the difference. United probably had a more disciplined shape which made an interesting observation that's all. Pundits love drawing lines and all that.

Liverpool still defended with every man back and it was pointed out by the pundits at half time how penned in you were so don't think it was missed.

On the balance of play, given you should expect the home side to have the onus to attack, Liverpool were pretty unadventurous. I'd certainly be really annoyed if United serve up a similarly negative home performance at OT later this season.

 

[Finn MacCool]

Perhaps not the best example as the ball is quite far forward, but look how tucked in Utds fullbacks are - its not like your "wingers" are doubling up on a Liverpool attacker. Its virtually a flat back 6.

Anyway you got a point, so the end justifies the means.

 

[Kraftwerker]

Perhaps not the best example as the ball is quite far forward, but look how tucked in Utds fullbacks are - its not like your "wingers" are doubling up on a Liverpool attacker. Its virtually a flat back 6.

Anyway you got a point, so the end justifies the means.

One screenshot without context doesn't really tell the story of the match.

Anyone with eyes could see United didn't have to defend so deep for most of the match because there was virtually no pressure from a negative home side.

And again, an out of context screenshot from one phase of play in the closing stages ignores the utter dominance of United's first half performance, as if that suddenly doesn't count.

If we play as negatively as you did last night when we're at home at OT, then you can come and whinge about tactics. Though you'll look pretty hypocritical.

 

[Finn MacCool]

One screenshot without context doesn't really tell the story of the match.

Anyone with eyes could see United didn't have to defend so deep for most of the match because there was virtually no pressure from a negative home side.

And again, an out of context screenshot from one phase of play in the closing stages ignores the utter dominance of United's first half performance, as if that suddenly doesn't count.

If we play as negatively as you did last night when were at home at OT, then you can come and whinge about tactics.

Its up to you whether you want to believe me that Sky showed this happening a few times last night - you not believing it doesn't change the fact that it happened.

In the first half Utd didn't defend deep - but when we had the ball you packed the defence, as the image shows. In the second half you got deeper and deeper.

Our performance, especially first half, was poor last night. It wasn't intentionally negative, no matter how you or Mourinho try to spin it. We just didnt perform well - whereas you did perform well but much of that involved a defensive negative setup. Thats understandable as you were away from home to a team who were scoring lots of gaols - had you committed more men forward, especially your wingers, you may have scored, but likely conceded as well.

 

[Klopper76]

One screenshot without context doesn't really tell the story of the match.

Anyone with eyes could see United didn't have to defend so deep for most of the match because there was virtually no pressure from a negative home side.

And again, an out of context screenshot from one phase of play in the closing stages ignores the utter dominance of United's first half performance, as if that suddenly doesn't count.

If we play as negatively as you did last night when we're at home at OT, then you can come and whinge about tactics. Though you'll look pretty hypocritical.

You're wording it like Klopp sent us out there to be negative. The reality is that we were poor in the first half, couldn't keep the ball and couldn't build up any attacks because United did a very good job of stopping us in the right area's. Klopp was quite clearly frustrated at half time and you don't really believe that he sent his players out there to contain United do you?

You seem to want us to be enraged at our performance but considering we've played 10 games across all competitions and won 7, drawing two and losing the other one, it's hard to really be upset about one bad 45 minutes.

Klopp is anything but a negative manager, and I wouldn't describe our performance last night as negative in the slightest. Frustrating, poor for large periods, below par? Yes definitely.

 

[Kraftwerker]

Its up to you whether you want to believe me that Sky showed this happening a few times last night - you not believing it doesn't change the fact that it happened.

In the first half Utd didn't defend deep - but when we had the ball you packed the defence, as the image shows. In the second half you got deeper and deeper.

Our performance, especially first half, was poor last night. It wasn't intentionally negative, no matter how you or Mourinho try to spin it. We just didnt perform well - whereas you did perform well but much of that involved a defensive negative setup. Thats understandable as you were away from home to a team who were scoring lots of gaols - had you committed more men forward, especially your wingers, you may have scored, but likely conceded as well.

You're putting a brave face on it but it was a negative shit-show from a home team. Not sure how you think it wasn't intentional either. You barely wanted to come out of your half for most of the game. That's tactical not accidental.

Anyway, as I said, come back and have a moan if United are any way as negative or shit as Liverpool last night in the OT leg. I'll be a willing participant in your bitching because it's not acceptable for a home team to be that cowardly, against a rival or not.

 

[Rafateria]

One screenshot without context doesn't really tell the story of the match.

Anyone with eyes could see United didn't have to defend so deep for most of the match because there was virtually no pressure from a negative home side.

And again, an out of context screenshot from one phase of play in the closing stages ignores the utter dominance of United's first half performance, as if that suddenly doesn't count.

Gary Neville :
.....
the problem was that Rashford and [Ashley] Young became so detached from their areas up front that they were playing in a back six. So actually to get up the pitch and into those areas to cross was difficult for United once they actually settled back. The game changed after 20 minutes in that United's wide players were certainly dragged back and [Antonio] Valencia and [Daley] Blind at times, especially Blind, was playing like a fourth centre back.

Notice also that '20 mins' bit. I said earlier in this thread that United were good (and Liverpool passed poorly) until the 20-25 mins when the game changed. So United didn't in fact dominate the 1st half as is being claimed by some and the torch taken up by others.

 

[Finn MacCool]

You're putting a brave face on it but it was a negative shit-show from a home team. Not sure how you think it wasn't intentional either. You barely wanted to come out of your half for most of the game. That's tactical not accidental.

Anyway, as I said, come back and have a moan if United are any way as negative or shit as Liverpool last night in the OT leg. I'll be a willing participant in your bitching because it's not acceptable for a home team to be that cowardly, against a rival or not.

Thats right Klopp said to his side "listen boys, you're great going forward, score loads of goals, and never mind the fact that we're at home and could go top of the league, I want you to change everything you've done this seasons so far - in fact go against the ethos I;ve tried to build in this team"

Yep that makes perfect sense.

 

[donkeyfish]

its not like your "wingers" are doubling up on a Liverpool attacker. Its virtually a flat back 6.

That is the intention though, being able to use both a CB/CM and FB against a player like Coutinho without leaving a highway for Clyne/Milner.

Look at what happened when Rooney appeared and didn't show the same diligence, Milner got a couple of opportunities instantly

 

[Kraftwerker]

Thats right Klopp said to his side "listen boys, you're great going forward, score loads of goals, and never mind the fact that we're at home and could go top of the league, I want you to change everything you've done this seasons so far - in fact go against the ethos I;ve tried to build in this team"

Yep that make perfect sense.

Klopp's also not stupid and was wary of losing a home game to a big rival sitting close behind in the league.

No one can convince me Liverpool were playing positively. Barely making it out of your half is not positive. Constantly passing it back to your keeper is not positive. Playing nervous keep ball in the back-line is not positive.

I completely agree United didn't do anywhere near enough to punish this and failed as a unit in the entire final third (including pressing the nervousness at the back effectively). But were untroubled and dominant in the first two thirds.

 

[Finn MacCool]

That is the intention though, being able to use both a CB/CM and FB against a player like Coutinho without leaving a highway for Clyne/Milner.

Look at what happened when Rooney appeared and didn't show the same diligence, Milner got a couple of opportunities instantly

Of course I agree when the attacking team is wide ideally you need your winger helping your full back - but as you see from the quote from Neville above it was at times a back 6.

I don't understand why people want to argue this fact - it worked for you. So what if you played a back 6 at times. I think its maybe because Utd are so synonymous with swashbuckling attacking football that its hard for fans to accept or to adjust - but like I said earlier Utd are adjusting to Mourinho not the other way around.

If he brings you trophies I'm sure some defensive tactics won't bother your fans too much.

 

[Finn MacCool]

Klopp's also not stupid and was wary of losing a home game to a big rival sitting close behind in the league.

No one can convince me Liverpool were playing positively. Barely making it out of your half is not positive. Constantly passing it back to your keeper is not positive. Playing nervous keep ball in the back-line is not positive.

I completely agree United didn't do anywhere near enough to punish this and failed as a unit in the entire final third (including pressing the nervousness at the back effectively). But were untroubled and dominant in the first two thirds.

There is a difference tho between failing to perform positively because of circumstances in the game and being set up negatively.

 

[Kraftwerker]

Of course I agree when the attacking team is wide ideally you need your winger helping your full back - but as you see from the quote from Neville above it was at times a back 6.

I don't understand why people want to argue this fact - it worked for you. So what if you played a back 6 at times. I think its maybe because Utd are so synonymous with swashbuckling attacking football that its hard for fans to accept or to adjust - but like I said earlier Utd are adjusting to Mourinho not the other way around.

If he brings you trophies I'm sure some defensive tactics won't bother your fans too much.

I think it's more bemusement that the Liverpool fans are trying to make out we were under the cosh or had to play like this to nullify the non-existent threat from your team.

Seems Liverpool fans are trying to make themselves feel better by making out they were hard done by or denied a win in some sort of backs-to-the-wall bus parking episode, when the game didn't play out like that at all, and Liverpool as the home team were relatively speaking the more negative side.

 

[Kraftwerker]

There is a difference tho between failing to perform positively because of circumstances in the game and being set up negatively.

I suppose it's a nicer easier-to-swallow way of saying "we played negatively".

 

[Finn MacCool]

I think it's more bemusement that the Liverpool fans are trying to make out we were under the cosh or had to play like this to nullify the non-existent threat from your team.

Seems Liverpool fans trying to make themselves feel better by making out they were hard done by or denied a win in some sort of backs-to-the-wall bus parking episode, when the game didn't play out like that at all, and Liverpool as the home team were relatively speaking the more negative side.

I don't think Ive seen any LFC fans in this thread suggest those things - certainly not to the extent you imply.

Suggesting that a team with 65% possession was the more negative doesn't really fit this does it> Negative teams don't generally dominate possession.

We wanted the ball, but for a large part of the game we used it poorly and couldn't break down a tight well organised (at times 6 man) backline.

Utds game plan worked - you stopped us from playing our game, but the trade off was that you offered little going forward yourselves.

 

[donkeyfish]

I don't understand why people want to argue this fact

I wasn't really trying to. We definitely played 6-3-1 for periods of that game.

I was attempting to explain why, or at least my understanding of why.

 

[Finn MacCool]

I wasn't really trying to. We definitely played 6-3-1 for periods of that game.

I was attempting to explain why, or at least my understanding of why.

Apologies - my misunderstanding.

 

[Kraftwerker]

I don't think Ive seen any LFC fans in this thread suggest those things - certainly not to the extent you imply.

Suggesting that a team with 65% possession was the more negative doesn't really fit this does it> Negative teams don't generally dominate possession.

We wanted the ball, but for a large part of the game we used it poorly and couldn't break down a tight well organised (at times 6 man) backline.

Utds game plan worked - you stopped us from playing our game, but the trade off was that you offered little going forward yourselves.

It does when you see that the possession was totally unambitious and sterile, often because you were penned in your own half.

You can't tell me you were comfortable with the constant back-passes to keeper and the nervous possession in the back-line. The angst in the crowd was palpable. Only one team is really in control of that situation and it's not the flappy keeper with the unsteady defenders ahead of him.

Most disappointing aspect of the match for me apart from Ibra's sitter: Pogba failing to close Henderson down after a nervous pass and touch from the keeper. And the other time when your keeper played it straight to Pogba inside the box and he rushed his pass to offside Ibra instead of taking control and really turning the screw.

Definite failure of our front players last night. Game was there for us. Don't think it was ever there for you.

 

[Finn MacCool]

It does when you see that the possession was totally unambitious and sterile, often because you were penned in your own half.

You can't tell me you were comfortable with the constant back-passes to keeper and the nervous possession in the back-line. The angst in the crowd was palpable. Only one team is really in control of that situation and it's not the flappy keeper with the unsteady defenders ahead of him.

Most disappointing aspect of the match for me apart from Ibra's sitter: Pogba failing to close Henderson down after a nervous pass and touch from the keeper. And the other time when your keeper played it straight to Pogba inside the box and he rushed his pass to offside Ibra instead of taking control and really turning the screw.

Definite failure of our front players last night. Game was there for us. Don't think it was ever there for you.

In the first half (especially the first half hour) its fair to say that a lot of our possession was in our half. But I would hazard a guess that a large chunk of our possession in the second half was in your half, and we cut thru your defence twice (not much in fairness for us, compared to other games recently, but most of those teams didn't play 6 at the back).

I wasn't happy with our performance generally - whether that be the couple of flaps at the back or our failure to get our passing game going, but none of that was down to a negative mentality or setup by Klopp. In fact if anything by playing Sturridge up front he was taking a risk as he's not part of our best line up right now. That in itself was an attacking setup. He could easily have gone for Lucas in midfield and not played Sturridge - which would fit your negative conspiracy theory much better.

Pogba was perhaps your poorest player - aside from that nice bit of skill to get the cross for Zlatan he didn't do that much. Even Mourinho expressed his disappointment afterwards about him.

I hope you come out at OT because it will open the game up and make it more exciting. That last night was a snoozefest, and no matter how much you want to put that solely down to us (and we are partly to blame) there is no doubt Utd's first priority last night was to not concede. From that perspective it was job done.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

I don't think Liverpool were intentionally negative, it looked like they simply couldn't work out how to approach our goal. We were negative with 65% possession at times last season and the season before - we'd play it around the box slowly and cautiously, afraid to take a risk. Liverpool played the ball quickly and with some risk when they were able to, but for much of the game they were too stifled to be able to try

 

[NK86]

Gary Neville :
.....
the problem was that Rashford and [Ashley] Young became so detached from their areas up front that they were playing in a back six. So actually to get up the pitch and into those areas to cross was difficult for United once they actually settled back. The game changed after 20 minutes in that United's wide players were certainly dragged back and [Antonio] Valencia and [Daley] Blind at times, especially Blind, was playing like a fourth centre back.

Notice also that '20 mins' bit. I said earlier in this thread that United were good (and Liverpool passed poorly) until the 20-25 mins when the game changed. So United didn't in fact dominate the 1st half as is being claimed by some and the torch taken up by others.

Yeah because Neville was the only one watching the game while the rest of us were hearing it on radio or reading it off texts or something.

 

[Zoo]

65% possession and just two shots on target is something similar to what Louis Van Gaal used to get slammed for week in week out at United.

 

[Kraftwerker]

In the first half (especially the first half hour) its fair to say that a lot of our possession was in our half. But I would hazard a guess that a large chunk of our possession in the second half was in your half, and we cut thru your defence twice (not much in fairness for us, compared to other games recently, but most of those teams didn't play 6 at the back).

I wasn't happy with our performance generally - whether that be the couple of flaps at the back or our failure to get our passing game going, but none of that was down to a negative mentality or setup by Klopp. In fact if anything by playing Sturridge up front he was taking a risk as he's not part of our best line up right now. That in itself was an attacking setup. He could easily have gone for Lucas in midfield and not played Sturridge - which would fit your negative conspiracy theory much better.

Pogba was perhaps your poorest player - aside from that nice bit of skill to get the cross for Zlatan he didn't do that much. Even Mourinho expressed his disappointment afterwards about him.

I hope you come out at OT because it will open the game up and make it more exciting. That last night was a snoozefest, and no matter how much you want to put that solely down to us (and we are partly to blame) there is no doubt Utd's first priority last night was to not concede. From that perspective it was job done.

There's no 'negative conspiracy' you were just negative last night for a home side. No great shame in it given the circumstances. I'm not labelling Klopp a negative manager, he's clearly not.

I'm not putting last night's game solely down to your approach. We were also participants in how the game played out particularly after Rashford went off and we seemed to decide that a point was fine (which it was).

Both sides played not to lose. Liverpool fans would probably be more disappointed with that being the home team and I don't anticipate our home approach will resemble Liverpool's.

 

[Klopper76]

65% possession and just two shots on target is something similar to what Louis Van Gaal used to get slammed for week in week out at United.

Difference being it's not a common occurrence under Klopp. If it was then we'd be up in arms over it as well (dependent on results I suppose). I'm sure some heads will be turned if we have a similar performance against West Brom, but something tells me we'll have a fair few shots in that one. Whether we win or not is another question.

 

[Cassady]

You had nine touches in our half
In what way is completely stopping your opposition from playing not domination?

That us not domination in my eyes. I said in the in game thread United have us sussed but its not total domination which is what I quoted.

Total domination you'd expect to have a few shots on target.

Fair play to youse. Your game plan worked and I tip me bobble to youse.

 

[Rafateria]

Yeah because Neville was the only one watching the game while the rest of us were hearing it on radio or reading it off texts or something.

Because he is streets .. nay worlds ... ahead of you in his ability to analysis a match (as everyone on here knows).

 

[Rafateria]

I don't think Liverpool were intentionally negative, it looked like they simply couldn't work out how to approach our goal. We were negative with 65% possession at times last season and the season before - we'd play it around the box slowly and cautiously, afraid to take a risk. Liverpool played the ball quickly and with some risk when they were able to, but for much of the game they were too stifled to be able to try

Is the correct assessment.

 

[Rafateria]

You had nine touches in our half
In what way is completely stopping your opposition from playing not domination?

That stat is a total fabrication (either by you or you picking up someone else's stat and perpetuating the falsehood). Simple check .. look at the Sky running commentary, we had more than that many excursions into your half in the first 45 mins (naturally since, even as Neville said, the match changed after 20 mins, with United becoming far more defensive as we pressed forward). Do you think each excursion was one touch ? Logic alone tells you 9 touches is simply impossible, but then logic isn't your strong point is it.

 

[Rafateria]

That us not domination in my eyes. I said in the in game thread United have us sussed but its not total domination which is what I quoted.

Total domination you'd expect to have a few shots on target.

Fair play to youse. Your game plan worked and I tip me bobble to youse.

6 touches in our penalty area in the whole match. Yep, domination it is.